TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (4) TMI 461
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. The Revenue's sole substantive grievance pleaded in the instant appeal seeks to reverse the CIT(A)' action deleting sec. 271AAB penalty of Rs.16052500/- imposed by the Assessing Officer in his order dated 22.09.2015. The CIT(A)'s detailed discussion to this effect reads as under:- "5. Discussion, and, Decision: My discussion will be mostly like-wise as for the AY 2012-13. 5.1 Foremost, the subject matter - what is that 'undisclosed income'? It is only a mere statement. Though the statement is recorded u/s. 132(4), but in the absence of any identifiable income or asset, or, specific entry found in any books of account or documents or transactions - the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ove, the Explanation (c) does not find place in this instant case. So, in the impugned penalty order to reproduce the clause (a) to the subsection (1) to the said section 271AAB - was only to put in some stuffing for the body of the penalty order. 5.5 The ACIT AO / JCIT has started the argument for imposing the penalty - that the assessee had not filed appeal against the assessment. This argument is out of context - for when the assessee had honoured the 132(4) statement, offered the additional amount in the return of income, and the assessment has been made accepting the returned income - then it is an illogical argument that the assessee has not filed appeal against the assessment order. In this context....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Being aggrieved, the assessee has come in appeal on the following grounds:- GROUNDS OF APPEAL 1) That the AO was wrong in imposing penalty of Rs. 1,60,52,500/- u/s 271AAB, being the 10% of the income disclosed under sec. 132(4) of the Act. The penalty so levied is wrong and need to be deleted. 2) The assessee craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any ground or grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing. Sd/- illegible. The appellant had suo-moto offered the income stated -honouring the statement u/s. 132(4). 5.6 Coming back to the crux of the issue - regarding income merely in statement recorded - there is the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sudarshan Silk ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned the relevant facts qua assessee's alleged undisclosed income as to whether the same represented any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing or any entry in the books of account or other document in the light of the foregoing explanation. We also notice that their lordships judgment in Sudarshan Silk Mills (supra) does not deal with the impugned statutory provision but involved sec.271(1)(c) penalty proceedings only. We therefore reverse the CIT(A)'s lower appellate findings under challenge to this effect in principle. 6. Next comes yet another most important aspect involved in the instant lis as to whether there is any "undisclosed" income involved going by sec. 271AAB Explanation (c) or not. A perusal of the cas....